The Limits to Globalization Theory: A Geographic Perspective on Global Economic Change

* This is a substantially revised version of an earlier paper, “Questioning the Uneven Terrains of Economic Globalization,” presented at the Conference on Geographies of Global Economic Change, Graduate School of Geography, Clark University, Worcester, Mass., 12–14 October 2001. I would like to thank David Angel, Dick Peet, Yuko Aoyama, and other organizers of the conference for their kind invitation to attend the conference. I also received useful comments from Neil Brenner, Neil Coe, Philip Kelly, Bae-Gyoon Park, James Sidaway, Nigel Thrift, and the participants at the conference. Four anonymous referees of Economic Geography offered detailed and relevant comments. In particular, I want to thank one referee who suggested Justin Rosenberg’s recent provocative book, The Follies of Globalisation Theory, from which I borrowed substantially in revising the paper. Finally, I gratefully acknowledge the financial support (R-109–000–007–112) I received from the National University of Singapore for my intellectual project on globalization.

Abstract

The nature of globalization and global economic change has been a subject of immense academic research during the past two decades. The Janus face of globalization, however, continues to obfuscate our understanding of its complex processes and alleged geographic outcomes. In this article, I theorize on the indispensable role of geography in conceptualizing economic globalization. I argue that economic globalization is an inherently geographic phenomenon in relation to the transcendence and switchability of geographic scales and discursive practices as sociospatial constructions. Given its complex spatiality, economic globalization is more a phenomenon in need of explanations than a universal cause of empirically observable outcomes in the so-called globalization theory. To illustrate my theoretical claims, I analyze the complex interrelationships between globalization processes and the recent Asian economic crisis. Some implications for future globalization research in geography are offered.

Keywords:

• social theory
• globalization
• geographic scales
• discourses
• Asian economic crisis

Notes

* This is a substantially revised version of an earlier paper, “Questioning the Uneven Terrains of Economic Globalization,” presented at the Conference on Geographies of Global Economic Change, Graduate School of Geography, Clark University, Worcester, Mass., 12–14 October 2001. I would like to thank David Angel, Dick Peet, Yuko Aoyama, and other organizers of the conference for their kind invitation to attend the conference. I also received useful comments from Neil Brenner, Neil Coe, Philip Kelly, Bae-Gyoon Park, James Sidaway, Nigel Thrift, and the participants at the conference. Four anonymous referees of Economic Geography offered detailed and relevant comments. In particular, I want to thank one referee who suggested Justin Rosenberg’s recent provocative book, The Follies of Globalisation Theory, from which I borrowed substantially in revising the paper. Finally, I gratefully acknowledge the financial support (R-109–000–007–112) I received from the National University of Singapore for my intellectual project on globalization.